§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked what sum was paid for the property known as Hollesley Bay, and what sum has since been expended on the property; what has been the total cost of working the colony and, after giving credit for any profits made, what is the net loss on the undertaking; how many men have been employed at Hollesley Bay and what has been the cost per 980 average man employed there, including the allowance made to families and pocket money; what has been the average period of employment and how many men have been given employment on more than one occasion; and what percentage of men receiving temporary employment at Hollesley Bay is now in permanent employment on the land in other parts of the country and in other industries?
§ Mr. BURNSThe total amount paid for the purchase of the Colony, including the value of improvements made prior to its transfer to the Central (Unemployed) Body, stock, stores, etc., and law costs, was £43,475. I am not in a position to state precisely what sum has been expended on the property, but from a statement supplied by the Central (Unemployed) Body the amount spent on buildings would appear to be some £12,000. This, I understand, would include some repairs and maintenance of buildings. From the same statement it would appear that the total cost of working the Colony up to 27th January last was £159,732, whilst the amount realised by sales, etc., is given as £38,156. The number of men employed up to 31st January last was 6,724. If we take the net expenditure on the estate as £121,576, the net cost of maintenance per man per week works out approximately at 30.9s. This is exclusive of loan charges and any allowance for the enhanced value of the estate. The average period of employment is 11.7 weeks. The number of men who have been given employment on more than one occasion up to 31st March last was 179. The number of men from Hollesley Bay in permanent employment on the land in other parts of the country up to the same date is, I am informed, nineteen, and at other kinds of work seventeen.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEDoes not the right hon. Gentleman think that the time has come when Hollesley Bay might be sold for some more useful purpose?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat does not arise.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEWhat is the enhanced value of the estate?
§ Mr. BURNSThe enhanced value given by the Central (Unemployed) Body's valuer is £11,000 odd. The difference between the Local Government Board and the valuer of the Central Body is responsible for the difference in the calculation of the number of shillings per week.
§ Mr. LANSBURYIn calculating the cost per man has there been included in the figure 30s., also the maintenance of the women and children in London?
§ Mr. BURNSI think that in order to avoid confusion and the possibility of misrepresentation on this point, if the hon. Member would give notice of any further information that he wants it will be better that the whole of the facts should be brought before the House by hon. Members without any misinterpretation from any quarter.